Does moral conviction really override concerns about procedural justice? A reexamination of the value protection model

Jaime Napier, Tom R. Tyler

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

A large research literature on procedural justice demonstrates that people are more accepting of decisions that they do not feel are advantageous or fair when those decisions are arrived at using just procedures. Recently, several papers (Skitka, Pers Soc Psychol Bull, 28:588-597, 2002; Skitka and Mullen, Pers Soc Psychol Bull, 28:1419-1429, 2002) have argued that these procedural mechanisms do not have a significant influence when the decision made concerns issues about which those involved have strong moral feelings ("a moral mandate"). A reanalysis of the data in these two studies indicates that, contrary to the strong position taken by the authors, i.e. that "when people have a moral mandate about an outcome, any means justifies the mandated end" (Skitka, Pers Soc Psychol Bull, 28:594, 2002), the justice of decision-making procedures is consistently found to significantly influence people's reactions to decisions by authorities and institutions even when their moral mandates are threatened.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)509-528
Number of pages20
JournalSocial Justice Research
Volume21
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2008

Fingerprint

justice
Values
decision making

Keywords

  • Moral conviction
  • Procedural justice
  • Relational model
  • Value protection model

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Anthropology
  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Law

Cite this

Does moral conviction really override concerns about procedural justice? A reexamination of the value protection model. / Napier, Jaime; Tyler, Tom R.

In: Social Justice Research, Vol. 21, No. 4, 01.12.2008, p. 509-528.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{1d8020cce196487895bb0771ce5afd02,
title = "Does moral conviction really override concerns about procedural justice? A reexamination of the value protection model",
abstract = "A large research literature on procedural justice demonstrates that people are more accepting of decisions that they do not feel are advantageous or fair when those decisions are arrived at using just procedures. Recently, several papers (Skitka, Pers Soc Psychol Bull, 28:588-597, 2002; Skitka and Mullen, Pers Soc Psychol Bull, 28:1419-1429, 2002) have argued that these procedural mechanisms do not have a significant influence when the decision made concerns issues about which those involved have strong moral feelings ({"}a moral mandate{"}). A reanalysis of the data in these two studies indicates that, contrary to the strong position taken by the authors, i.e. that {"}when people have a moral mandate about an outcome, any means justifies the mandated end{"} (Skitka, Pers Soc Psychol Bull, 28:594, 2002), the justice of decision-making procedures is consistently found to significantly influence people's reactions to decisions by authorities and institutions even when their moral mandates are threatened.",
keywords = "Moral conviction, Procedural justice, Relational model, Value protection model",
author = "Jaime Napier and Tyler, {Tom R.}",
year = "2008",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s11211-008-0083-y",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "21",
pages = "509--528",
journal = "Social Justice Research",
issn = "0885-7466",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Does moral conviction really override concerns about procedural justice? A reexamination of the value protection model

AU - Napier, Jaime

AU - Tyler, Tom R.

PY - 2008/12/1

Y1 - 2008/12/1

N2 - A large research literature on procedural justice demonstrates that people are more accepting of decisions that they do not feel are advantageous or fair when those decisions are arrived at using just procedures. Recently, several papers (Skitka, Pers Soc Psychol Bull, 28:588-597, 2002; Skitka and Mullen, Pers Soc Psychol Bull, 28:1419-1429, 2002) have argued that these procedural mechanisms do not have a significant influence when the decision made concerns issues about which those involved have strong moral feelings ("a moral mandate"). A reanalysis of the data in these two studies indicates that, contrary to the strong position taken by the authors, i.e. that "when people have a moral mandate about an outcome, any means justifies the mandated end" (Skitka, Pers Soc Psychol Bull, 28:594, 2002), the justice of decision-making procedures is consistently found to significantly influence people's reactions to decisions by authorities and institutions even when their moral mandates are threatened.

AB - A large research literature on procedural justice demonstrates that people are more accepting of decisions that they do not feel are advantageous or fair when those decisions are arrived at using just procedures. Recently, several papers (Skitka, Pers Soc Psychol Bull, 28:588-597, 2002; Skitka and Mullen, Pers Soc Psychol Bull, 28:1419-1429, 2002) have argued that these procedural mechanisms do not have a significant influence when the decision made concerns issues about which those involved have strong moral feelings ("a moral mandate"). A reanalysis of the data in these two studies indicates that, contrary to the strong position taken by the authors, i.e. that "when people have a moral mandate about an outcome, any means justifies the mandated end" (Skitka, Pers Soc Psychol Bull, 28:594, 2002), the justice of decision-making procedures is consistently found to significantly influence people's reactions to decisions by authorities and institutions even when their moral mandates are threatened.

KW - Moral conviction

KW - Procedural justice

KW - Relational model

KW - Value protection model

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=54249085293&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=54249085293&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11211-008-0083-y

DO - 10.1007/s11211-008-0083-y

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:54249085293

VL - 21

SP - 509

EP - 528

JO - Social Justice Research

JF - Social Justice Research

SN - 0885-7466

IS - 4

ER -